Originally Posted by mankite
"Here you've hit on a big difference between amplifiers that is relevant and material to intelligent audio consumers.
Many amp makers/marketers are too cheap, lazy, or callous to submit their amps to certification bodies (OSHA-approved NRTL) to verify their electrical safety, etc.
That failure will make smart consumers favor amps from more responsible companies, such as Anthem."
If that's the case then why did the Anthem P5 amp I demoed on an all Aerial system sound so much worse then the BAT VK-6200 on the same system. The Anthem has more power yet sounded muddy in the mid bass and sibilance on dialog. Once the less powerful BAT was substituted in whole new ballgame.
What is "mudddy mid bass"?
And how would that change amp to amp?
(assuming all the other items in the food chain the same, speaker&location, pre-pro, EQ, your MLP, etc)
Now I'm curious, in your room what is your bass decay time 20-200hz?
Any waterfall plots to share?
I'm sure that will show what's really happening.
Now, "sibilance on dialog" ... I had to look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibilant
Sibilance is a manner of articulation of fricative and affricate consonants, made by directing a stream of air with the tongue towards the sharp edge of the teeth, which are held close together; a consonant that uses sibilance may be called a sibilant. Examples of sibilants are the consonants at the beginning of the English words sip, zip, ship, chip, and Jeep, and the second consonant in vision. The symbols in the International Phonetic Alphabet used to denote the sibilant sounds in these words are, respectively, [.s] [z] [ʃ] [tʃ] [dʒ] [ʒ]. (The sounds [tʃ] [dʒ], as in chip and Jeep, are affricates; the rest are fricatives.) Sibilants have a characteristically intense sound, which accounts for their non-linguistic use in getting one's attention (e.g. calling someone using "sssst!" or quieting someone using "shhhh!").
In the alveolar hissing sibilants [.s] and [z], the back of the tongue forms a narrow channel (is grooved) to focus the stream of air more intensely, resulting in a high pitch. With the hushing sibilants (occasionally termed shibilants), such as English [ʃ], [tʃ], [ʒ], and [dʒ], the tongue is flatter, and the resulting pitch lower.[we need cite that they are not grooved]
Sibilants may also be called stridents, a term which refers to the perceptual intensity of the sound of a sibilant consonant, or obstacle fricatives/affricates, which refers to the critical role of the teeth in producing the sound as an obstacle to the airstream. Non-sibilant fricatives and affricates produce their characteristic sound directly with the tongue or lips etc. and the place of contact in the mouth, without secondary involvement of the teeth.
The characteristic intensity of sibilants means that small variations in tongue shape and position are perceivable, with the result that there are a large number of sibilant types that contrast in various languages.
Sibilants are louder than their non-sibilant counterparts, and most of their acoustic energy occurs at higher frequencies than non-sibilant fricatives. [.s] has the most acoustic strength at around 8,000 Hz, but can reach as high as 10,000 Hz. [ʃ] has the bulk of its acoustic energy at around 4,000 Hz, but can extend up to around 8,000 Hz.
So you are saying that somehow
the Anthem amp was smart enough to only affect dialog like that? Wow.